Taima, A., Hilal, O., Al-Shammari, A., Naseriparsa, M. (2025). An empirical mathematical model to select the best controller in software-defined networks infrastructure. , 18(3), 233-238. doi: 10.30772/qjes.2024.149238.1217
Alaa Taima; Osama Majeed Hilal; Ahmed Mohammed Al-Shammari; Mehdi Naseriparsa. "An empirical mathematical model to select the best controller in software-defined networks infrastructure". , 18, 3, 2025, 233-238. doi: 10.30772/qjes.2024.149238.1217
Taima, A., Hilal, O., Al-Shammari, A., Naseriparsa, M. (2025). 'An empirical mathematical model to select the best controller in software-defined networks infrastructure', , 18(3), pp. 233-238. doi: 10.30772/qjes.2024.149238.1217
Taima, A., Hilal, O., Al-Shammari, A., Naseriparsa, M. An empirical mathematical model to select the best controller in software-defined networks infrastructure. , 2025; 18(3): 233-238. doi: 10.30772/qjes.2024.149238.1217

An empirical mathematical model to select the best controller in software-defined networks infrastructure

Al-Qadisiyah Journal for Engineering Sciences
Volume 18, Issue 3, September 2025, Pages 233-238    PDF (6.82 M)
Document Type: Research Paper
DOI: 10.30772/qjes.2024.149238.1217
Authors
Alaa Taima* 1; Osama Majeed Hilal1; Ahmed Mohammed Al-Shammari1; Mehdi Naseriparsa2
1Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, University of Al-Qadisiyah, Al Diwaniyah, 58002, Iraq.
2Institute of Innovation, Science and Sustainability, Federation University, University Drive, Mt Helen, Ballarat, Australia.
Abstract
Software Defined Networks (SDNs) are one of the most important modern technologies in the field of networks, because of their advantages in the architecture and management of networks and control of their full functionality. SDN is distinguished from traditional networks by the presence of a central control element, which is the controller that is responsible for all operations that occur in the network. The controller is the main element that determines the success or failure of software-defined networks, so it was necessary to study and compare the different types of controllers that exist today. This paper proposes an empirical mathematical model to choose the best controller for SDN by using a Mininet emulator, concerning two performance metrics (Throughput and latency) for diverse parameters such as different types of topologies, diverse numbers of hosts, diverse numbers of switches, and diverse numbers of threads. These performance metrics have different weights depending on the needs of the users. We employ OpenFlow as a southbound protocol and five SDN controllers (Ryu, POX, OpenDaylight (ODL), and Floodlight). The results demonstrate that the suggested mathematical model is effective and flexible in choosing the best controller since the weights of performance measures are selected based on the needs of the user. The performance of the SDN network is better with ODL than with other SDN controllers.
Keywords
SDN; Mininet; Mathematical Model; Ryu; POX; ODL; Floodlight
References
  • K. Govindarajan, K. Meng, and H. Ong, “A literature review on software-defined networking (sdn) research topics, challenges, and solutions,” IEEE,In 2013 Fifth International Conference on Advanced Computing (ICoAC), pp. 293–299, December 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICoAC.2013.6921966
  • Y. Zhang and M. Chen, “Performance evaluation of software-defined network (sdn) controllers using dijkstra’s algorithm,” Wireless Networks, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 3787–3800, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-022-03044-3
  • O. Nafea and T. Khaleel, “An improved throttling algorithm for fog computing networks with an additional management layer,” Al-Qadisiyah Journal for Engineering Sciences, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 390–399, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.30772/qjes.2024.146104.1089
  • D. Ryait and M. Sharma, “Performance evaluation of sdn controllers,” Singapore: Springer NatureSingapore. In International Conference on Information, Communication and Computing Technology, vol. 757, pp. 1009–1021, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-5166-6 68
  • D. Kreutz, F. Ramos, P. Verissimo, C. Rothenberg, S. Azodolmolky, and S. Uhlig, “Software-defined networking: A comprehensive survey,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 14–76, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2014.2371999
  • MiniNet. [Online]. Available: http://mininet.org/
  • M. Al-Somaidai and E. B. Yahya, “Survey of software components to emulate openflow protocol as an sdn implementation,” American Journal of Software Engineering and Applications, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 74–82, 2014. Available: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajsea.20140306.12
  • W. Xia, Y. Wen, C. Foh, Niyato, and H. Xie, “A survey on software-defined networking.” IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 27–51, 2014. [Online]. Available:
    https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2014.2330903
  • N. Gude, T. Koponen, J. Pettit, B. Pfaff, M. Casado, N. McKeown, and S. Shenker, “Nox: towards an operating system for networks,” ACM SIGCOMM computer communication review, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 105–110, 2008. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1384609.1384625
  • M. Monaco, O. Michel, and E. Keller, “Applying operating system principles to sdn controller design,” In Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks, no. 2, pp. 1–7, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.1145/2535771.2535789
  • L. Mamushiane, A. Lysko, and S. Dlamini, “A comparative evaluation of the performance of popular sdn controllers,” IEEE , In 2018 Wireless Days (WD),Dubai, pp. 54–59, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/WD.2018.8361694\
  • E. Amiri, E. Alizadeh, and M. H. Rezvani, “Controller selection in software-defined networks using best-worst multi-criteria decision-making,” Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1506– 1517, 2020. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.11591/eei.v9i4.2393
  • D. H. Mendoza, L. T. Oquendo, and L. A. Marrone, “A comparative evaluation of the performance of open-source sdn controllers,” Latin- American Journal of Computing, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 64–77, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5745007
  • S. Badotra and S. N. Panda, “Experimental comparison and evaluation of various openflow software-defined networking controllers,” International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering, vol. 17, no. 4, p. 317–324, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.6703/IJASE.202012 17(4).317
  • M. Abdullah, N. Al-Awad, and F.W. Hussein, “Performance comparison and evaluation of different software-defined networks controllers,” International Journal of Computing and Network Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://doi.org/10.12785/ijcnt/060201
  • S. Mittal, “Performance evaluation of openflow sdn controllers,” Intelligent Systems Design and Applications, pp. 913–923, December 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76348-4 87
  • F. Zobary, “Applying topsis method for software-defined networking (sdn) controllers comparison and selection,” Communications and Networking, vol. 210, pp. 132–141, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66628-0 13
  • A. Haggag, “Benchmarking and performance analysis of software defined networking controllers in normal and failsafe operations using multiple redundant controllers,” Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), vol. 12, no. 13, pp. 5192– 5202, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i13.9706
  • K. Kaur, S. Kaur, and V. Gupta, “Performance analysis of python-based openflow controllers,” 3rd International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Engineering Trends, Communication, Optimization and Sciences, pp. 1–4, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2016.1515
  • S. Rowshanrad, V. Abdi, and M. Keshtgari, “Performance evaluation of sdn controllers: Floodlight and opendaylight,” IIUM Engineering Journal, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 47–57, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumej.v17i2.615
  • I. Bholebawa and U. Dalal, “Performance analysis of sdn/openflow controllers: Pox versus floodlight,” Wireless Personal Communications, vol. 98, no. A, pp. 1679–1699, August 2017. [Online]. Available:
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-017-4939-z
  • A. Bondkovskii, J. Keeney, S. van der Meer, and S. Weber, “Qualitative comparison of open-source sdn controllers,” IEEE: In NOMS 2016- 2016 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management
    Symposium, pp. 889–894, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/NOMS.2016.7502921
  • J. Ali, B. Roh, and S. Lee, “Qos improvement with an optimum controller selection for software-defined networks,” Plos one, vol. 14, no. 5, p. e0217631, May 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0217631
  • S. Shamim, S. Shisir, A. Hasan, M. Hasan, and A. Hossain, “Performance analysis of different open flow-based controllers over software-defined networking,” Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology, vol. 18(1-C), no. 1, 2018. [Online]. Available: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
  • A. Aliyu, P. Bull, and A. Abdallah, “Performance implication and analysis of the openflow sdn protocol,” IEEE.In 2017 31st International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications
    Workshops (WAINA), pp. 391–396, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/WAINA.2017.101
  • S. Islam, M. A. Khan, S. Shorno, S. Sarker, and M. A. Siddik, “Performance evaluation of sdn controllers in wireless network,” IEEE.In 2019 1st International Conference on Advances in Science, Engineering
    and Robotics Technology (ICASERT), p. 1–5, 2019,May. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASERT.2019.8934553
  • L. Zhu, M. Karim, K. Sharif, X. Du, and M. Guizani, “Sdn controllers: Benchmarking performance evaluation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.04491, 2019. [Online]. Available:
    https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1902.04491
  • U. Singh, V. Vankhede, S. Maheshwari, D. Kumar, and N. Solanki, “Review of software defined networking: Applications, challenges and advantages,” Springer International Publishing In Inventive Computation Technologies, vol. 98, pp. 815–826, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33846-6 89
  • B. Nunes, M. Mendonca, X. Nguyen, K. Obraczka, and T. Turletti, “A survey of software-defined networking: Past, present, and future of programmable networks,” IEEE Communications surveys tutorials, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1617–1634, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2014.012214.00180
  • B. A. Nunes, M. Mendonca, X.-N. Nguyen, K. Obraczka, and T. Turletti, “A survey of software-defined networking: Past, present, and future of programmable networks,” IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1617–1634, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/SURV.2014.012214.00180
  • Ryu controller, Ryu SDN Framework Community. [Online]. Available: https://ryu-sdn.org/
  • POX controller. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/noxrepo/pox
  • OpenDayLight controller,OpenDaylight Project a Series of LF Projects,. [Online]. Available: https://www.opendaylight.org/
  • Floodlight controller. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/floodlight/ floodlight
  • R. Sherwood and K. Yap, Cbench: controller benchmarker. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/mininet/oflops/tree/master/cbench
  • R. Bhavadharini and S. Karthik, “Blockchain enabled metaheuristic cluster based routing model for wireless networks,” Computer Systems Science and Engineering, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 1233–1250, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2023.025461
  • O. Nafea and T. Khaleel, “An improved throttling algorithm for fog computing networks with an additional management layer,” Al-Qadisiyah Journal for Engineering Sciences, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 390–399, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.30772/qjes.2024.146104.1089
Statistics
Article View: 1,013
PDF Download: 533


Journal Management System. Powered by iJournalPro.com